posted
Past: I think I paid too much attention to Keita's (2010) admonishments about genetic and language correlations.
Keita's a solo rarely doing his own, or teaming with researchers tackling, non out of the freezer analyses and investigations.
Something called Mantel Test compares genetics with geography or languages for relationships. I will start to pay more attention to this in the reports where I'ved overlooked it.
In this opening post I wanted to share caveats but my notes are on another device but I'll at least post Wood's (2005) nrY phylogeny vs African macro lingusitic phyla. Yeah, it's old but Wood is still cited in current studies like Cruciani (2010, 2011); Campbell, Veeramah, Scheinfeldt, Naidoo, (all 2010); de Fillipo, Trombetta, (both 2011); Veeramah, Torres, Scozzari, (all 2012); and Badro (2013).
Elizabeth T Wood et al Contrasting patterns of Y chromosome and mtDNA variation in Africa: evidence for sex-biased demographic processes European Journal of Human Genetics (2005) 13, 867–876
Maximum-parsimony tree of 50 Y chromosome biallelic markers typed in this survey. The root of the tree is denoted by an arrow. Major clades (ie, A−R) are labeled with large capital letters. Subclade labels (eg, A3b) are indicated to the left of the branches. Mutation names are given along the branches. The length of each branch is not proportional to the number of mutations or the age of the mutation. Only the names of the 36 haplogroups observed in the present study are shown to the right of the branches. Haplogroup frequencies are shown on the far right.
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted Cesare de Filippo et al Y-Chromosomal Variation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Insights Into the History of Niger-Congo Groups Mol Biol Evol (2011) 28 (3): 1255-1269
Haplogroup composition of the combined dataset The size of the pie charts is proportional to the sample size as shown in the bottom-right. Groups marked with # indicate that the sub-haplogroup composition of E1b1a was inferred by LDA. Only the major African haplogroups (A, B, and sub-haplogroups of E) are displayed; the remaining haplogroups are lumped under the label “other”. Population labels are color-coded according to linguistic phyla as indicated in the upper right, with Pygmy groups (gray) indicated separately from other groups.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
Interesting findings. You have a point about Keita's admonishment regarding biogenesis vs. ethnogenesis. Language is perhaps the only cultural trait that can be carried by an actual person similar to genes. So there may we be a correlation. The Wood et al. diagram pretty much supports Swenet's claims that Afraisian speakers in Africa are pretty much associated with presumed 'Eurasian' clades like J, K, F, and R though not solely.
beyoku Member # 14524
posted
I think they should have broken down the subclades of A and B. It would be quite easy to see A3b2 and B2a1a associated with Nilo-Saharans. Failure of Resolution on their part.
The E2 lineages on the other hand are E2a which definitely has a Great Lakes Nilo-Saharan Affiliation.
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Every study can't include everything so please enrich this thread with more studies so that we benefit.
More language-genetic charts and figures coming up!
This is unexplored territory for me and I want to learn all I can about it.
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
wow
this topic gets bantered around in many other threads
but make a thread devoted to it and ...
campers among crickets
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: I didn't know the Berber branch only goes back to 2000 BCE. What did all the north coastal people Sirte and further west speak? Did all those populations undergo language shift since the Maghreb proper mtDNA evinces trans-Holocene continuity?
The idea is that proto-Berber goes back to around this time, or even later (2-2.5ky), according to some estimates (Louali and Philippson 2004), but this is based on comparing the diversity within extant Berber languages, to other languages (I’m not sure if North Africa's demographic dynamics are similar enough to Europe’s to just carelessly extrapolate like this). There is also talks of Berber names in Egyptian records from the Old Kingdom, but this in and of itself doesn’t necessarily imply that proto-Berber needs to pushed back to this date. I however, do push back Proto-Berber to this period and earlier, but I don't necessarily limit proto-Berber to whatever linguistic clade modern Berbers belong to (which is fixed in time), so I'm not limited by those coalescence dates.
Anyway, Guanche Berbers could have narrowed down the age of Proto-Berber, but there is too little data available to conclusively say whether they spoke Berber proper or some upstream pre-Proto-Berber off-shoot. So, to answer your question, suggestions have been that before this, Berbers people spoke a Berber language that joins up with the ancestors of Proto-Berber (an example of this could be Numidian) and before that, further back in time, with proto-Chadic, ’’Semitic and ’’Egyptian, if we’re to go with Ehret.
Yes, as indicated I wrote it back in 2006 and reposting it for all to critique and help bring it up to date (or even totally discredit). Even back then I found it essential to give mutations since phylogenies constantly change with new data.
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Originally posted November, 2006 by alTakruri:
Genetic conclusion are drawn from living populations. High frequency African specific lineage relevant DNA in TaMazgha is mtDNAU6 and NRYE3b-M35.
U6a has a coalescence ranging between 41-14kya per HVSI sequences. It has a west to east expansion making it a strong candidate for an Aterian female base.
U6a1 (19-7.5kya) with an east to west expansion is at the tail end of the Aterian, all throughout the Mouillian, and most likely signals the Capsian which arose first in East Africa though named after Gafsa, the site in North Africa where archaeologist first dug up relics of the industry. This is a time period of proto-Afrisan and proto-NiloSaharan. A language ancestral to both (namely proto-Wider Area Of Northern Affinity) may have been carried from east to north Africa.
The other U6 subgroups (U6b, U6c, and U6b1) occur almost exclusively in western populations and by HVSI coalescence dating would appear during all the pleistocene industries. The exception being U6b1 which is strictly holocene while U6c's coalescence covers both the late pleistocene and early holocene. On their return to the U6a birthplace, U6a1 would encounter the already in place older U6b and U6c indigenous to that region.
E3b-M35 has a coalescence ranging between 46-27kya per average squared difference. It probably originated in eastern Africa. Highest frequencies are in the "Khoisan" and Oromo. It could be the male base of the Aterian that was later absorbed and displaced.
E3b1-M78 (33-25kya), derived from E3b-M35, also most likely arose in eastern Africa and fits the Aterian time frame. By late expansion, it may also signal the Mouillian which is known to be related to the Halfan industry in the Nile Valley. It has high frequencies in Ethiopia, Sudan, and Kenya.
E3b2-M81 (11-6kya), also an E3b-M35 derivative, likewise first appeared in eastern Africa. It's more in line with the Capsian and Neolithic Saharan. The first Wider Area of Northern Affinity languages was at this particularly proto-NiloSaharan. Afrisan had begun splitting so that by the lower limit proto-Tamazight was born. Certain languages in the Wider Area of Southern Affinity may have started in the Sahara along with languages not truly fitting any strict classification system. This subclade is considered to be the Amazigh marker.
NEOLITHIC SAHARAN meld of the above as above as above Saharo-Sudanese *E3b-M81*
.
The Aterian was highly concentrated in the Atlas but had an outreach that included the Sahara and Libya. Its practioners may've resembled "Khoisan". Archaeological finds show the Mouillian "PaleaMediterraneans" occupied the littoral from Libya to Morocco. Oranian finds are also scattered over this same whole area. Capsian "AfricanMediterranean" relics are all inland away from the coast. The Neolithic Sahara industry of the Saharo-Sudanese replaced the earlier industry but not the morphologies. Apparently only a few pioneer Saharo-Sudanese ventured toward the coast introducing technologies similar to the so-called Khartoum "Mesolithic". The neolithic transfer was moreso cultural than demic. All of these Maghrebi industries and NRY haplogroups show links with the Nile Valley. The mtDNA haplogroups mostly suggest local Maghreb al Aqsa continuities.
the lioness, Member # 17353
posted
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
There is a reason behind lack of resolution.....the more you read and understand, why. A lot of questions can be answered with appropriate resolution.
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: I think they should have broken down the subclades of A and B. It would be quite easy to see A3b2 and B2a1a associated with Nilo-Saharans. Failure of Resolution on their part.
The E2 lineages on the other hand are E2a which definitely has a Great Lakes Nilo-Saharan Affiliation.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Originally posted November, 2006 by alTakruri:
Genetic conclusion are drawn from living populations. High frequency African specific lineage relevant DNA in TaMazgha is mtDNAU6 and NRYE3b-M35.
U6a has a coalescence ranging between 41-14kya per HVSI sequences. It has a west to east expansion making it a strong candidate for an Aterian female base.
U6a1 (19-7.5kya) with an east to west expansion is at the tail end of the Aterian, all throughout the Mouillian, and most likely signals the Capsian which arose first in East Africa though named after Gafsa, the site in North Africa where archaeologist first dug up relics of the industry. This is a time period of proto-Afrisan and proto-NiloSaharan. A language ancestral to both (namely proto-Wider Area Of Northern Affinity) may have been carried from east to north Africa.
The other U6 subgroups (U6b, U6c, and U6b1) occur almost exclusively in western populations and by HVSI coalescence dating would appear during all the pleistocene industries. The exception being U6b1 which is strictly holocene while U6c's coalescence covers both the late pleistocene and early holocene. On their return to the U6a birthplace, U6a1 would encounter the already in place older U6b and U6c indigenous to that region.
E3b-M35 has a coalescence ranging between 46-27kya per average squared difference. It probably originated in eastern Africa. Highest frequencies are in the "Khoisan" and Oromo. It could be the male base of the Aterian that was later absorbed and displaced.
E3b1-M78 (33-25kya), derived from E3b-M35, also most likely arose in eastern Africa and fits the Aterian time frame. By late expansion, it may also signal the Mouillian which is known to be related to the Halfan industry in the Nile Valley. It has high frequencies in Ethiopia, Sudan, and Kenya.
E3b2-M81 (11-6kya), also an E3b-M35 derivative, likewise first appeared in eastern Africa. It's more in line with the Capsian and Neolithic Saharan. The first Wider Area of Northern Affinity languages was at this particularly proto-NiloSaharan. Afrisan had begun splitting so that by the lower limit proto-Tamazight was born. Certain languages in the Wider Area of Southern Affinity may have started in the Sahara along with languages not truly fitting any strict classification system. This subclade is considered to be the Amazigh marker.
NEOLITHIC SAHARAN meld of the above as above as above Saharo-Sudanese *E3b-M81*
.
The Aterian was highly concentrated in the Atlas but had an outreach that included the Sahara and Libya. Its practioners may've resembled "Khoisan". Archaeological finds show the Mouillian "PaleaMediterraneans" occupied the littoral from Libya to Morocco. Oranian finds are also scattered over this same whole area. Capsian "AfricanMediterranean" relics are all inland away from the coast. The Neolithic Sahara industry of the Saharo-Sudanese replaced the earlier industry but not the morphologies. Apparently only a few pioneer Saharo-Sudanese ventured toward the coast introducing technologies similar to the so-called Khartoum "Mesolithic". The neolithic transfer was moreso cultural than demic. All of these Maghrebi industries and NRY haplogroups show links with the Nile Valley. The mtDNA haplogroups mostly suggest local Maghreb al Aqsa continuities.
Supplementing Tukuler's above post with these anthropological findings.
In the sum, the results obtained further strengthen the results from previous analyses. The affinities between Nazlet Khater, MSA, and Khoisan and Khoisan related groups re-emerges. In addition it is possible to detect a separation between North African and sub-saharan populations, with the Neolithic Saharan population from Hasi el Abiod and the Egyptian Badarian group being closely affiliated with modern Negroid groups. Similarly, the Epipaleolithic populations from Site 117 and Wadi Halfa are also affiliated with sub-Saharan LSA, Iron Age and modern Negroid groups rather than with contemporaneous North African populations such as Taforalt and the Ibero-maurusian. -- Pierre M. Vermeersch (Author & Editor), 'Palaeolithic quarrying sites in Upper and Middle Egypt', Egyptian Prehistory Monographs Vol. 4, Leuven University Press (2002).
Both hypotheses are compatible with the hypothesis proposed by Brothwell (1963) of an East African proto-Khoisan Negro stock which migrated southwards and westwards at some time during the Upper Pleistocene, and replaced most of the local populations of South Africa. Under such circumstances, it is possible that the Nazlet Khater specimen is part of a relict population of this proto-Khoisan Negro stock which extended as far north as Nazlet Khater at least until the late part of the Late Pleistocene. --- The Position of the Nazlet Khater Specimen Among Prehistoric and Modern African and Levantine Populations, Ron Pinhasi, Departent of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, U.K., Patrick Semal, Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Belgium; Journal of Human Evolution (2000) vol. 39.
make whatever theory of genetics and languages apply as you will.
Swenet Member # 17303
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: I didn't know the Berber branch only goes back to 2000 BCE. What did all the north coastal people Sirte and further west speak? Did all those populations undergo language shift since the Maghreb proper mtDNA evinces trans-Holocene continuity?
The idea is that proto-Berber goes back to around this time, or even later (2-2.5ky), according to some estimates (Louali and Philippson 2004), but this is based on comparing the diversity within extant Berber languages, to other languages (I’m not sure if North Africa's demographic dynamics are similar enough to Europe’s to just carelessly extrapolate like this). There is also talks of Berber names in Egyptian records from the Old Kingdom, but this in and of itself doesn’t necessarily imply that proto-Berber needs to pushed back to this date. I however, do push back Proto-Berber to this period and earlier, but I don't necessarily limit proto-Berber to whatever linguistic clade modern Berbers belong to (which is fixed in time), so I'm not limited by those coalescence dates.
Anyway, Guanche Berbers could have narrowed down the age of Proto-Berber, but there is too little data available to conclusively say whether they spoke Berber proper or some upstream pre-Proto-Berber off-shoot. So, to answer your question, suggestions have been that before this, Berbers people spoke a Berber language that joins up with the ancestors of Proto-Berber (an example of this could be Numidian) and before that, further back in time, with proto-Chadic, ’’Semitic and ’’Egyptian, if we’re to go with Ehret.
Yes, as indicated I wrote it back in 2006 and reposting it for all to critique and help bring it up to date (or even totally discredit). Even back then I found it essential to give mutations since phylogenies constantly change with new data.
Yes. The OP basically says it all. These correlations would have been even stronger when filtering out admixture events. For example, the Khoisan have recent admixture that isn't native to them. This can be attributed mostly to East African pastoralists going down south very recently. I don't any of that Khoisan *E-M35 is E-M35 proper. Its probably mostly E-M293, which was discovered after this 2005 paper was published. The Berber clades in between E-M81 and E-M35 could also have many implications for our understanding of ancient Berbers, and the extend to which modern Berbers populations (who are mainly E-M81) are representative of all of them.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
de Felippo's Tanzania data includes four major language families (Click Nilotic Bantu Afrisian). It could be a good test of language group genetic signatures considering Tanzania's regional history.
Majority haplogroups with frequencies in speakers ~37% A ____________ Click ~55% E1b1b1 _______ Nilotic ~55% E1b1a*'7a'8 ___ Bantu ~45% E1b1b1 _______ Afrisian
Assessing de Filippo:
* A is Click's likely signature
* E-M2 (derivatives) for Niger-Kordofanian
* E-M35 for Nilo-Saharan and Afrisian like Tishkoff's genome data implicates genetic unity by sharing the same likely signature.
__________
Higher Y resolution could decide between Afrisian and Nilo-Saharan for M78 M81 M123 M281 V6 P72 at signature significance in Africa.
E-M81 is well known as the Afrisian Berber signature.
E-M123, hi-freq Dead Sea, is a likely Afrisian signature.
As far as African markers go Click speakers' genesis is separate from NiloSaharan NigerKordofanian and Afrisian which all three root in E-P2.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
An article I wish I could access.
Gerrit J. Dimmendaal Language Ecology and Linguistic Diversity on the African Continent Language and Linguistics Compass Volume 2, Issue 5, pages 840–858, September 2008
Abstract Africanists have been criticized by comparative linguists working on language families in other parts of the world for being lumpers. The present contribution reviews current views among specialists on genetic diversity on the African continent. In addition, some of the causal mechanisms behind this language diversity are investigated. More specifically, the role played by innovations in subsistence economies and climatological changes is discussed. Special emphasis, however, is put on attitudes towards the role of language as a marker of social identity and their effect on language diversity.
Swenet Member # 17303
posted
May fit here for those interested in teasing out the identity of North Africans prior to the expansion of Nilo-Saharan, Afrasan and Niger-Kordofanian speakers:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: I said I wasn't surprised to find that he was Hg E. As for Hg E1b1a it's presence in ancient Egypt agrees with archaeology. It is connected with the sorghum/millet/pottery complex.
You're only contradicting yourself with this admission, which you state in a matter of fact type of way, even though there is no evidence in existence which points to the claim that E1b1a is linked to Sorghum/Millet cultivators.
There is no need to view E1b1a as any more recent in the Nile Valley than E-M35. There is 10ky of Nile Valley history that neither E-M78 nor E-M35 can account for, but that E1b1a CAN account for, along with B-M60 and A-M13.
quote:Originally posted by rainingburntice: The highest frequency of E1b1a is in West Africa and the oldest pottery is found in Mali 9400 BC. From there this Nilo-Saharan culture moved east and is found at Nabta Playa 7000 BC.
Another bizarre claim. We don't know when E1b1a carrying Africans migrated to the region of this Mali pottery find, and prior to this E1b1a migration, West African populations wouldn't have been high E1b1a, but A and E-M33, among other Y chromosomes. Notice that the prehistoric pottery site where pre-E1b1a West Africans resided, is Dogon territory. Point? Dogon are high in this prehistoric West African clade (E-M33).
Your link of E1b1a and Nilo-Saharans is totally pulled out of thin air. Even certain Levantines and certain Arabs have more E1b1a than the average Nilo-Saharan. Might as well pull out your Euronut hat and say that Ramses III got his E1b1a from Palestinians and/or Arabs.
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Should've posted this one first
Wood's data's purpose is specifically to assess genetic - language correlation continent wide
Majority haplogroups with frequencies in speakers ~48% A _____ Click ~30% E-M2 __ NiloSaharan ~68% E-M2 __ NigerKordofanian ~35% E-M35 _ Afrisian
A is Click's likely signature
E-M2 for Nilo-Saharans excluding Mbuti B frequencies because their original language is lost and they only adopted Sudanic.
E-M2 for Niger-Kordofanian
E-M35 for Afrisian. Unlike the later de Filippo and Tishkoff studies Wood only has minor allignment of Nilo-Saharan here not implying genetic signature nor much genetic sharing with Afrisian.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: de Felippo's Tanzania data includes four major language families (Click Nilotic Bantu Afrisian). It could be a good test of language group genetic signatures considering Tanzania's regional history.
Majority haplogroups with frequencies in speakers ~37% A ____________ Click ~55% E1b1b1 _______ Nilotic ~55% E1b1a*'7a'8 ___ Bantu ~45% E1b1b1 _______ Afrisian
Assessing de Filippo:
* A is Click's likely signature
* E-M2 (derivatives) for Niger-Kordofanian
* E-M35 for Nilo-Saharan and Afrisian like Tishkoff's genome data implicates genetic unity by sharing the same likely signature.
__________
Higher Y resolution could decide between Afrisian and Nilo-Saharan for M78 M81 M123 M281 V6 P72 at signature significance in Africa.
E-M81 is well known as the Afrisian Berber signature.
E-M123, hi-freq Dead Sea, is a likely Afrisian signature.
As far as African markers go Click speakers' genesis is separate from NiloSaharan NigerKordofanian and Afrisian which all three root in E-P2.
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I don't any of that Khoisan *E-M35 is E-M35 proper. Its probably mostly E-M293, which was discovered after this 2005 paper was published.
Thanks for the heads up. Its news to me though its old as 2008.
Swenet Member # 17303
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I don't any of that Khoisan *E-M35 is E-M35 proper. Its probably mostly E-M293, which was discovered after this 2005 paper was published.
Thanks for the heads up. Its news to me though its old as 2008.
Here is my take on it, which is mostly overlapping with yours:
1) Hap A is a pan-African marker, just like the STR alleles extracted by Hawass 2010, 2012. The basal nature of NRY A necessitates that its a pan African marker, and the oldest A branches have been found in the North of modern day Khoisan speakers. All modern populations descend from this person, and E, the most common macro-group in Africa today, is relatively young.
2) Hap B? See above. IMO, its more useful to see these groups as signatures of certain populations, in terms of the region they inhabit. So, for example, NRY A and B can be seen as Nilo-Saharan markers in Sudan and Ethiopia, while in the South, if they're found in Boers populations for example, they're more indicative of Khoisan ancestry.
3) If Niger-Kordofanian is a linguistic reality, E-M2 likely emerged after the Niger-Congo/Kordofanian split, since E-M2 has not been found in the Nuba area so far. Further indication of this is that Tishkoff et al's 'Niger-Kordofanian' ancestry features in the Sudan and Chad in ways that E-M2 does not (look at the Ks in the stacked bars, not the ones in the pie charts). Again, probably testament to the fact that E-M2 represents a relatively young snapshot of ancestry that is much older.
4) E-M35 is Afrasan in its entirety. Non-Afrasan speakers that have it only have it because of admixture. They don't have E-M35 of their own (like Berbers and Horners do, for instance), and the various E-M35 subclades don't appear consistently in some of the other populations that speak the same non-Afrasan language phylum. This points to sporadic oontacts with proto, pre-proto or Afrasan speakers.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ What about R, specifically M173?? Not only is it found among Chadic speakers in West Africa like Nigeria, Niger, and Chad, but also in Egypt among rural Egyptians as well as among southern Levantine people like Jordanians. Do you think it possible R1 (whether its presence in Africa is the result of back-migration or not) has as much to do with the expansion of Afrasian as E-M35?
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
quote: Originally posted by Akachi:
Tukler.. he has been here for over a decade, and is unwilling to disclose his opinion on the origins of Niger-Congo speakers and their context throughout the African story. What is wrong with that man?!